The Perception of Speech Under Adverse Conditions

Speech is the primary vehicle of human social interaction. In everyday life, speech communication occurs under an enormous range of different environmental conditions. The demands placed on the process of speech communication are great, but nonetheless it is generally successful. Powerful selection pressures have operated to maximize its effectiveness. The adaptability of speech is illustrated most clearly in its resistance to distortion. In transit from speaker to listener, speech signals are often altered by background noise and other interfering signals, such as reverberation, as well as by imperfections of the frequency or temporal response of the communication channel. Adaptations for robust speech transmission include adjustments in articulation to offset the deleterious effects of noise and interference (Lombard 1911; Lane and Tranel 1971); efficient acousticphonetic coupling, which allows evidence of linguistic units to be conveyed in parallel (Hockett 1955; Liberman et al. 1967; Greenberg 1996; see Diehl and Lindblom, Chapter 3); and specializations of auditory perception and selective attention (Darwin and Carlyon 1995). Speech is a highly efficient and robust medium for conveying information under adverse conditions because it combines strategic forms of redundancy to minimize the loss of information. Coker and Umeda (1974, p. 349) define redundancy as “any characteristic of the language that forces spoken messages to have, on average, more basic elements per message, or more cues per basic element, than the barest minimum [necessary for conveying the linguistic message].” This definition does not address the function of redundancy in speech communication, however. Coker and Umeda note that “redundancy can be used effectively; or it can be squandered on uneven repetition of certain data, leaving other crucial items very vulnerable to noise. . . . But more likely, if a redundancy is a property of a language and has to be learned, then it has a purpose.” Coker and Umeda conclude that the purpose of redundancy in speech communication is to provide a basis for error correction and resistance to noise.

[1]  R. W. Hukin,et al.  Perceptual segregation of a harmonic from a vowel by interaural time difference and frequency proximity. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  S. Zahorian,et al.  Spectral-shape features versus formants as acoustic correlates for vowels. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  C. M. Marin,et al.  Segregation of concurrent sounds. II: Effects of spectral envelope tracing, frequency modulation coherence, and frequency modulation width. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  M. E. Lutman,et al.  Hearing science and hearing disorders , 1983 .

[5]  C V Pavlovic,et al.  An evaluation of some assumptions underlying the articulation index. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  R. Patterson,et al.  Complex Sounds and Auditory Images , 1992 .

[7]  A. Macleod,et al.  Quantifying the contribution of vision to speech perception in noise. , 1987, British journal of audiology.

[8]  B. Delgutte,et al.  Speech coding in the auditory nerve: IV. Sounds with consonant-like dynamic characteristics. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  S. Sheft,et al.  A simulated “cocktail party” with up to three sound sources , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[10]  J. Mullennix,et al.  Talker Variability in Speech Processing , 1997 .

[11]  Brian C. J. Moore,et al.  Formulae describing frequency selectivity as a function of frequency and level, and their use in calculating excitation patterns , 1987, Hearing Research.

[12]  S Buus,et al.  Age of second-language acquisition and perception of speech in noise. , 1997, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[13]  Brian Hanson,et al.  Robust speaker-independent word recognition using static, dynamic and acceleration features: experiments with Lombard and noisy speech , 1990, International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[14]  Quentin Summerfield Roles of Harmonicity and Coherent Frequency Modulation in Auditory Grouping. , 1992 .

[15]  K. Stevens Acoustic correlates of some phonetic categories. , 1979, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  L. Carney,et al.  Temporal coding of resonances by low-frequency auditory nerve fibers: single-fiber responses and a population model. , 1988, Journal of neurophysiology.

[17]  J. C. R. Licklider,et al.  Masking of Speech by Line‐Spectrum Interference , 1957 .

[18]  G. E. Peterson,et al.  Control Methods Used in a Study of the Vowels , 1951 .

[19]  James P. Egan,et al.  On the Intelligibility of Bands of Speech in Noise , 1946 .

[20]  Allen A. Montgomery,et al.  A Comparison of the Effects of Hearing Impairment and Acoustic Filtering on Consonant Recognition , 1981 .

[21]  L. L. Elliott,et al.  Verbal auditory closure and the speech perception in noise (SPIN) Test. , 1995, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[22]  N. Viemeister,et al.  Forward masking by enhanced components in harmonic complexes. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  Brian C. J. Moore,et al.  Modeling the effects of extraneous sounds on the perceptual estimation of first-formant frequency in vowels , 1991 .

[24]  D J Van Tasell,et al.  Speech waveform envelope cues for consonant recognition. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  T Houtgast,et al.  Spectral sharpness and vowel dissimilarity. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  H Müsch,et al.  Using statistical decision theory to predict speech intelligibility. I. Model structure. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  Q Summerfield Speech perception in normal and impaired hearing. , 1987, British medical bulletin.

[28]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Speech perception without traditional speech cues. , 1981, Science.

[29]  J M Festen,et al.  Limited resolution of spectral contrast and hearing loss for speech in noise. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[30]  Michaël Titus Maria Scheffers,et al.  Sifting vowels. Auditory pitch analysis and sound segregation. , 1983 .

[31]  Joseph W. Hall,et al.  Detection in noise by spectro-temporal pattern analysis. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[32]  T. Houtgast,et al.  Quantifying the intelligibility of speech in noise for non-native listeners. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  Steven Greenberg,et al.  Speech Intelligibility is Highly Tolerant of Cross-Channel Spectral Asynchrony , 1998 .

[34]  I. Kheirallah,et al.  Dynamic formant tracking of noisy speech using temporal analysis on outputs from a nonlinear cochlear model , 1993, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[35]  R. Carhart,et al.  Monaural and Binaural Discrimination against Competing Sentences , 1965 .

[36]  L L Elliott,et al.  Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. , 1977, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  G. F. Kuhn Model for the interaural time differences in the azimuthal plane , 1977 .

[38]  R. Plomp,et al.  Effect of reducing slow temporal modulations on speech reception. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[39]  R Drullman,et al.  Temporal envelope and fine structure cues for speech intelligibility. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  N I Durlach,et al.  Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing I: Intelligibility differences between clear and conversational speech. , 1985, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[41]  A. Bregman,et al.  The perceptual segregation of simultaneous auditory signals: Pulse train segregation and vowel segregation , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[42]  R L Smith,et al.  Adaptation, saturation, and physiological masking in single auditory-nerve fibers. , 1979, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[43]  D. Broadbent Perception and communication , 1958 .

[44]  H. Rubenstein,et al.  Intelligibility of Known and Unknown Message Sets , 1959 .

[45]  Richard Lippmann,et al.  Accurate consonant perception without mid-frequency speech energy , 1996, IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process..

[46]  A. Nabelek,et al.  English consonant recognition in noise and in reverberation by Japanese and American listeners. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[47]  R. M. Warren,et al.  Speech perception and phonemic restorations , 1971 .

[48]  John H. Grose,et al.  Relative Contributions of Envelope Maxima and Minima to Comodulation Masking Release , 1991 .

[49]  D Kewley-Port,et al.  Auditory models of formant frequency discrimination for isolated vowels. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[50]  R A Bentler,et al.  Does hearing aid benefit increase over time? , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[51]  B. Lindblom Phonetic Universals in Vowel Systems , 1986 .

[52]  J. C. Webster,et al.  Listening to Differentially Filtered Competing Voice Messages , 1955 .

[53]  C V Pavlovic,et al.  Derivation of primary parameters and procedures for use in speech intelligibility predictions. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[54]  T. M. Nearey Static, dynamic, and relational properties in vowel perception. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[55]  K. D. Kryter Effects of Ear Protective Devices on the Intelligibility of Speech in Noise , 1946 .

[56]  J. M. Pickett,et al.  Effects of Vocal Force on the Intelligibility of Speech Sounds , 1956 .

[57]  Steven Greenberg,et al.  Speech intelligibility derived from exceedingly sparse spectral information , 1998, ICSLP.

[58]  R. W. Hukin,et al.  Comparison of the effect of onset asynchrony on auditory grouping in pitch matching and vowel identification , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

[59]  A. Nabelek,et al.  Monaural and binaural speech perception in reverberation for listeners of various ages. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[60]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[61]  T W Tillman,et al.  Release from multiple maskers: effects of interaural time disparities. , 1969, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[62]  R. Plomp,et al.  Effect of temporal envelope smearing on speech reception. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[63]  R. Plomp The Role of Modulation in Hearing , 1983 .

[64]  J K Shallop,et al.  Evaluation of a new spectral peak coding strategy for the Nucleus 22 Channel Cochlear Implant System. , 1994, The American journal of otology.

[65]  F. A. Bilsen,et al.  Psychophysical, Physiological and Behavioural Studies in Hearing , 1980 .

[66]  P K Kuhl,et al.  The contribution of fundamental frequency, amplitude envelope, and voicing duration cues to speechreading in normal-hearing subjects. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[67]  R. Keith,et al.  An effect of linguistic experience. Auditory word discrimination by native and non-native speakers of English. , 1978, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[68]  K S Helfer,et al.  Binaural cues and consonant perception in reverberation and noise. , 1994, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[69]  R P Carlyon Further evidence against an across-frequency mechanism specific to the detection of frequency modulation (FM) incoherence between resolved frequency components. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[70]  P F Assmann Modeling the perception of concurrent vowels: Role of formant transitions. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[71]  John J. Dreher,et al.  Effects of ambient noise on speaker intelligibility of words and phrases , 1957, The Laryngoscope.

[72]  Christine M. Rankovic An Application of the Articulation Index to Hearing Aid Fitting , 1991 .

[73]  R. Plomp,et al.  Effect of spectral envelope smearing on speech reception. II. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[74]  Irwin Pollack,et al.  Masking of Speech by Noise at High Sound Levels , 1958 .

[75]  A. Cheveigné Concurrent vowel identification. III. A neural model of harmonic interference cancellation , 1997 .

[76]  P F Assmann,et al.  The Perception of Back Vowels: Centre of Gravity Hypothesis , 1991, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[77]  C W Turner,et al.  Spread of masking in normal subjects and in subjects with high-frequency hearing loss. , 1986, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[78]  James A. Bashford,et al.  Increasing the intelligibility of speech through multiple phonemic restorations , 1992 .

[79]  S Gatehouse,et al.  Role of perceptual acclimatization in the selection of frequency responses for hearing aids. , 1993, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[80]  P E Rubin,et al.  On the intonation of sinusoidal sentences: contour and pitch height. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[81]  Q Summerfield,et al.  Auditory enhancement and the perception of concurrent vowels , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[82]  A. Duquesnoy Effect of a single interfering noise or speech source upon the binaural sentence intelligibility of aged persons. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[83]  B C Moore,et al.  Spectral contrast enhancement of speech in noise for listeners with sensorineural hearing impairment: effects on intelligibility, quality, and response times. , 1993, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[84]  W. Ainsworth Advances in speech, hearing and language processing , 1990 .

[85]  C. Darwin,et al.  Extracting spectral envelopes: formant frequency matching between sounds on different and modulated fundamental frequencies. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[86]  A. J. Watkins,et al.  Effects of spectral contrast on perceptual compensation for spectral-envelope distortion. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[87]  C Elberling,et al.  Prediction of intelligibility of non-linearly processed speech. , 1990, Acta oto-laryngologica. Supplementum.

[88]  K S Helfer,et al.  Aging and the binaural advantage in reverberation and noise. , 1992, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[89]  G. Fant,et al.  Two-formant Models, Pitch and Vowel Perception , 1975 .

[90]  Steven Greenberg,et al.  Speech intelligibility in the presence of cross-channel spectral asynchrony , 1998, Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, ICASSP '98 (Cat. No.98CH36181).

[91]  T W Tillman,et al.  Room acoustics effects on monosyllabic word discrimination ability for normal and hearing-impaired children. , 1978, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[92]  B. Lindblom,et al.  Modeling the judgment of vowel quality differences. , 1981, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[93]  J. Pickett,et al.  Monaural and binaural speech perception through hearing aids under noise and reverberation with normal and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1974, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[94]  K. Suomi,et al.  On talker and phoneme information conveyed by vowels: A whole spectrum approach to the normalization problem , 1984, Speech Commun..

[95]  V C Tartter,et al.  Identifiability of vowels and speakers from whispered syllables , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[96]  C. Darwin,et al.  The role of timbre in the segregation of simultaneous voices with intersecting F0 contours , 1993, Perception & psychophysics.

[97]  D A Fabry,et al.  Vowel identification and vowel masking patterns of hearing-impaired subjects. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[98]  M F Dorman,et al.  The recognition of sentences in noise by normal-hearing listeners using simulations of cochlear-implant signal processors with 6-20 channels. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[99]  Thomas Baer,et al.  Speech reception thresholds in noise with and without spectral and temporal dips for hearing‐impaired and normally hearing people , 1997 .

[100]  J A Bashford,et al.  Spectral restoration of speech: Intelligibility is increased by inserting noise in spectral gaps , 1997, Perception & psychophysics.

[101]  A. Liberman,et al.  Tempo of frequency change as a cue for distinguishing classes of speech sounds. , 1956, Journal of experimental psychology.

[102]  T Houtgast,et al.  A physical method for measuring speech-transmission quality. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[103]  S. Gordon-Salant,et al.  Recognition of multiply degraded speech by young and elderly listeners. , 1995, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[104]  Robert P Carlyon,et al.  Changes in the masked thresholds of brief tones produced by prior bursts of noise , 1989, Hearing Research.

[105]  Cj. Darwin Listening to two Things at Once , 1992 .

[106]  F. Zeng,et al.  Speech recognition with altered spectral distribution of envelope cues. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[107]  S Gatehouse,et al.  The time course and magnitude of perceptual acclimatization to frequency responses: evidence from monaural fitting of hearing aids. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[108]  C V Pavlovic,et al.  An articulation index based procedure for predicting the speech recognition performance of hearing-impaired individuals. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[109]  B. Delgutte,et al.  Neural correlates of the pitch of complex tones. II. Pitch shift, pitch ambiguity, phase invariance, pitch circularity, rate pitch, and the dominance region for pitch. , 1996, Journal of neurophysiology.

[110]  Q Summerfield,et al.  The role of frequency modulation in the perceptual segregation of concurrent vowels. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[111]  S. A. Shamma The Auditory Processing of Speech. , 1986 .

[112]  Bertrand Delgutte,et al.  Representation of speech-like sounds in the discharge patterns of auditory-nerve fibers. , 1979 .

[113]  Q. Summerfield,et al.  Modeling the perception of concurrent vowels: vowels with different fundamental frequencies. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[114]  P F Assmann,et al.  Acoustic and linguistic factors in the perception of bandpass-filtered speech. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[115]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Recognition of spoken words by native and non-native listeners: talker-, listener-, and item-related factors. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[116]  B C Moore,et al.  The influence of extraneous sounds on the perceptual estimation of first-formant frequency in vowels. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[117]  Sieb G. Nooteboom Perceptual confusions among Dutch vowels presented in noise , 1968 .

[118]  R Plomp,et al.  Objective analysis versus subjective assessment of vowels pronounced by native, non-native, and deaf male speakers of Dutch. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[119]  Q Summerfield,et al.  The contribution of waveform interactions to the perception of concurrent vowels. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[120]  D. Dirks,et al.  Effect of pulsed masking on selected speech materials. , 1969, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[121]  R. B. Gardner,et al.  Perceptual grouping of formants with static and dynamic differences in fundamental frequency , 1989 .

[122]  H. Fletcher,et al.  The Perception of Speech and Its Relation to Telephony , 1950 .

[123]  B. Delgutte,et al.  Neural correlates of the pitch of complex tones. I. Pitch and pitch salience. , 1996, Journal of neurophysiology.

[124]  D. Klatt Review of selected models of speech perception , 1989 .

[125]  COLIN CHERRY,et al.  Speech Communication in Very Noisy Environments , 1967, Nature.

[126]  J. C. Steinberg,et al.  Factors Governing the Intelligibility of Speech Sounds , 1945 .

[127]  T. Houtgast Psychophysical evidence for lateral inhibition in hearing. , 1972, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[128]  D D Dirks,et al.  Application of the Articulation Index and the Speech Transmission Index to the recognition of speech by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1986, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[129]  L E Humes,et al.  Further validation of the Speech Transmission Index (STI). , 1987, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[130]  J. Moncur,et al.  Binaural and monaural speech intelligibility in reverberation. , 1967, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[131]  H. J. M. Steeneken,et al.  Place Dependence of Timbre in Reverberant Sound Fields , 1973 .

[132]  J. Blauert Spatial Hearing: The Psychophysics of Human Sound Localization , 1983 .

[133]  G. Altmann Cognitive models of speech processing , 1991 .

[134]  Sid P. Bacon,et al.  Factors influencing temporal effects with notched-noise maskers , 1992, Hearing Research.

[135]  Ray Meddis,et al.  Virtual pitch and phase sensitivity of a computer model of the auditory periphery , 1991 .

[136]  K. D. Kryter Methods for the Calculation and Use of the Articulation Index , 1962 .

[137]  C Speaks,et al.  Effect of a competing message on synthetic sentence identification. , 1967, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[138]  Jont B. Allen,et al.  How do humans process and recognize speech? , 1993, IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process..

[139]  R. J. Irwin,et al.  Relations among temporal acuity, hearing loss, and the perception of speech distorted by noise and reverberation. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[140]  John F. Culling,et al.  Effects of simulated reverberation on the use of binaural cues and fundamental-frequency differences for separating concurrent vowels , 1994, Speech Commun..

[141]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Recognizing Spoken Words: The Neighborhood Activation Model , 1998, Ear and hearing.

[142]  B. Moore,et al.  Relative dominance of individual partials in determining the pitch of complex tones , 1985 .

[143]  J. Culling,et al.  Perceptual and computational separation of simultaneous vowels: cues arising from low-frequency beating. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[144]  R. Klinke,et al.  HEARING — Physiological Bases and Psychophysics , 1983, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[145]  Q. Summerfield,et al.  Auditory enhancement of changes in spectral amplitude. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[146]  A. Nabelek,et al.  Similarities of vowels in nonreverberant and reverberant fields. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[147]  C W Turner,et al.  The Time Course of Hearing Aid Benefit , 1997, Ear and hearing.

[148]  M F Dorman,et al.  Minimum spectral contrast for vowel identification by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[149]  L. Braida,et al.  Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing IV: Further studies of the role of speaking rate. , 1996, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[150]  Q. Summerfield,et al.  Modeling the perception of concurrent vowels: vowels with the same fundamental frequency. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[151]  Keith R. Kluender,et al.  Effects of glide slope, noise intensity, and noise duration on the extrapolation of FM glides through noise , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[152]  Q. Summerfield Audio-visual Speech Perception, Lipreading and Artificial Stimulation , 1983 .

[153]  T D Carrell,et al.  The effect of amplitude comodulation on auditory object formation in sentence perception , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[154]  T W Tillman,et al.  Perceptual masking in multiple sound backgrounds. , 1969, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[155]  A. Treisman VERBAL CUES, LANGUAGE, AND MEANING IN SELECTIVE ATTENTION. , 1964, The American journal of psychology.

[156]  T. D. Hanley,et al.  Effect of level of distracting noise upon speaking rate, duration and intensity. , 1949, The Journal of speech disorders.

[157]  R V Shannon,et al.  Speech Recognition with Primarily Temporal Cues , 1995, Science.

[158]  G. A. Miller The masking of speech. , 1947, Psychological bulletin.

[159]  H J McDermott,et al.  Speech processing for multichannel cochlear implants: variations of the Spectral Maxima Sound Processor strategy. , 1994, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[160]  E. C. Cherry Some Experiments on the Recognition of Speech, with One and with Two Ears , 1953 .

[161]  H. Gustafsson,et al.  Masking of speech by amplitude-modulated noise. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[162]  R. Plomp,et al.  Perceptual and physical space of vowel sounds. , 1969, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[163]  Q J Fu,et al.  Effects of noise and spectral resolution on vowel and consonant recognition: acoustic and electric hearing. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[164]  B C Moore,et al.  Masking patterns for synthetic vowels in simultaneous and forward masking. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[165]  R Plomp,et al.  The effect of linguistic entropy on speech perception in noise in young and elderly listeners. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[166]  S. Rosen Temporal information in speech: acoustic, auditory and linguistic aspects. , 1992, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[167]  A. Nabelek,et al.  Reverberant overlap- and self-masking in consonant identification. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[168]  A. J. Watkins Central, auditory mechanisms of perceptual compensation for spectral-envelope distortion. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[169]  P. Ladefoged Three areas of experimental phonetics , 1967 .

[170]  B. Moore Frequency Selectivity in Hearing , 1987 .

[171]  B Blesser,et al.  Speech perception under conditions of spectral transformation. I. Phonetic characteristics. , 1972, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[172]  J M Kates The short-time articulation index. , 1987, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[173]  A. Neuman,et al.  Children's perception of speech in reverberation. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[174]  A M Simpson,et al.  Spectral enhancement to improve the intelligibility of speech in noise for hearing-impaired listeners. , 1990, Acta oto-laryngologica. Supplementum.

[175]  Gunnar Fant,et al.  Acoustic Theory Of Speech Production , 1960 .

[176]  M. Dorman,et al.  Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for signal processors using sine-wave and noise-band outputs. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[177]  Ilse Lehiste,et al.  The Identification of Filtered Vowels , 1959 .

[178]  A. Liberman,et al.  An Experimental Study of the Acoustic Determinants of Vowel Color; Observations on One- and Two-Formant Vowels Synthesized from Spectrographic Patterns , 1952 .

[179]  C. Darwin,et al.  Perceptual separation of simultaneous vowels: within and across-formant grouping by F0. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[180]  M. Picheny,et al.  Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing , 1979 .

[181]  S. Rosen,et al.  Uncomodulated glimpsing in "checkerboard" noise. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[182]  A. W. F. Huggins Temporally segmented speech , 1975 .

[183]  P F Assmann,et al.  Time-varying spectral change in the vowels of children and adults. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[184]  T R Letowski,et al.  Vowel confusions of hearing-impaired listeners under reverberant and nonreverberant conditions. , 1985, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[185]  S. G. Nooteboom,et al.  Intonation and the perceptual separation of simultaneous voices , 1982 .

[186]  A M Liberman,et al.  Perception of the speech code. , 1967, Psychological review.

[187]  A. Marchal,et al.  Speech production and speech modelling , 1990 .

[188]  Mark Haggard,et al.  Temporal Patterning in Speech: The Implications of Temporal Resolution and Signal-Processing , 1985 .

[189]  L. Bernstein,et al.  Speechreading and the structure of the lexicon: computationally modeling the effects of reduced phonetic distinctiveness on lexical uniqueness. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[190]  K D KRYTER,et al.  The effects of noise on man. , 1959 .

[191]  D. Howes On the Relation between the Intelligibility and Frequency of Occurrence of English Words , 1957 .

[192]  C M Rankovic Factors governing speech reception benefits of adaptive linear filtering for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[193]  R J Stubbs,et al.  Effects of signal-to-noise ratio, signal periodicity, and degree of hearing impairment on the performance of voice-separation algorithms. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[194]  Norman J. Lass,et al.  Principles of Experimental Phonetics , 1996 .

[195]  D S Brungart,et al.  Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of two simultaneous talkers. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[196]  D D Dirks,et al.  The effect of spatially separated sound sources on speech intelligibility. , 1969, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[197]  S. Arlinger,et al.  Normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects' ability to just follow conversation in competing speech, reversed speech, and noise backgrounds. , 1992, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[198]  L. Chistovich,et al.  The ‘center of gravity’ effect in vowel spectra and critical distance between the formants: Psychoacoustical study of the perception of vowel-like stimuli , 1979, Hearing Research.

[199]  M. Schouten The auditory processing of speech : from sounds to words , 1992 .

[200]  Steven Greenberg,et al.  UNDERSTANDING SPEECH UNDERSTANDING: TOWARDS A UNIFIED THEORY OF SPEECH PERCEPTION , 1996 .

[201]  R F Job,et al.  Sources and effects of low-frequency noise. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[202]  M. D. Wang,et al.  Consonant confusions in noise: a study of perceptual features. , 1973, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[203]  S. Gelfand,et al.  Effects of small room reverberation upon the recognition of some consonant features , 1979 .

[204]  David B. Pisoni,et al.  Similarity neighborhoods of spoken words , 1991 .

[205]  A. Treisman Contextual Cues in Selective Listening , 1960 .

[206]  T. Yin,et al.  Envelope coding in the lateral superior olive. I. Sensitivity to interaural time differences. , 1995, Journal of neurophysiology.

[207]  L D Braida,et al.  Intelligibility of conversational and clear speech in noise and reverberation for listeners with normal and impaired hearing. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[208]  B. Moore Perceptual Consequences of Cochlear Damage , 1995 .

[209]  C. Darwin Perceiving vowels in the presence of another sound: constraints on formant perception. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[210]  J. Culling,et al.  Perceptual separation of concurrent speech sounds: absence of across-frequency grouping by common interaural delay. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[211]  Peter F. Assmann,et al.  Auditory Enhancement in Speech Perception , 1987 .

[212]  R. P. Fahey,et al.  Perception of back vowels: effects of varying F1 - F0 Bark distance. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[213]  J R Dubno,et al.  Growth of low-pass masking of pure tones and speech for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[214]  B. Moore,et al.  Effects of spectral smearing on the intelligibility of sentences in noise , 1993 .

[215]  D B Pisoni,et al.  Effects of cognitive workload on speech production: acoustic analyses and perceptual consequences. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[216]  C. Turner,et al.  The relation between vowel recognition and measures of frequency resolution. , 1989, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[217]  J M Festen Contributions of comodulation masking release and temporal resolution to the speech-reception threshold masked by an interfering voice. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[218]  G. A. Miller The Perception of Speech. , 1951 .

[219]  E. Carterette,et al.  Some Factors Affecting Multi‐Channel Listening , 1954 .

[220]  Björn Lindblom,et al.  Explaining Phonetic Variation: A Sketch of the H&H Theory , 1990 .

[221]  S Hawkins,et al.  The influence of spectral prominence on perceived vowel quality. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[222]  David B. Pisoni,et al.  Some acoustic-phonetic correlates of speech produced in noise , 1985, ICASSP '85. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[223]  Brian C. J. Moore,et al.  THE INFLUENCE OF EXTRANEOUS SOUNDS ON THE PERCEPTUAL ESTIMATION OF FIRST-FORMANT FREQUENCY IN VOWELS UNDER CONDITIONS OF ASYNCHRONY , 1991 .

[224]  L. F. Willems,et al.  Measurement of pitch in speech: an implementation of Goldstein's theory of pitch perception. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[225]  P F Assmann The role of formant transitions in the perception of concurrent vowels. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[226]  Gerald A Studebaker,et al.  Intensity-importance functions for bandlimited monosyllabic words. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[227]  N. Viemeister Temporal modulation transfer functions based upon modulation thresholds. , 1979, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[228]  Alan R. Palmer,et al.  Psychophysical and Physiological Advances in Hearing , 1998 .

[229]  Bertrand Delgutte,et al.  Auditory Neural Processing of Speech , 2002 .

[230]  G. A. Miller,et al.  An Analysis of Perceptual Confusions Among Some English Consonants , 1955 .

[231]  C V Pavlovic,et al.  A frequency importance function for continuous discourse. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[232]  S. S. Stevens,et al.  Handbook of experimental psychology , 1951 .

[233]  R W Hukin,et al.  Perceptual segregation of a harmonic from a vowel by interaural time difference in conjunction with mistuning and onset asynchrony. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[234]  Herman J. M. Steeneken,et al.  Validation of the revised STIr method , 2002, Speech Commun..

[235]  L D Braida,et al.  Single Band Amplitude Envelope Cues as an Aid to Speechreading , 1991, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[236]  A K Nábĕlek,et al.  Identification of vowels in quiet, noise, and reverberation: relationships with age and hearing loss. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[237]  R. Plomp,et al.  Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech-reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[238]  C Ludvigsen Prediction of speech intelligibility for normal-hearing and cochlearly hearing-impaired listeners. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[239]  J. Bird Effects of a difference in fundamental frequency in separating two sentences. , 1997 .

[240]  J M Festen,et al.  Relations between auditory functions in normal hearing. , 1981, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[241]  R Meddis,et al.  Modeling the identification of concurrent vowels with different fundamental frequencies. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[242]  G. L. Powers,et al.  Intelligibility of temporally interrupted speech with and without intervening noise , 1973 .

[243]  R. M. Warren Perceptual Restoration of Missing Speech Sounds , 1970, Science.

[244]  H. K. Dunn,et al.  Statistical Measurements on Conversational Speech , 1940 .

[245]  T. M. Nearey,et al.  Identification of resynthesized /hVd/ utterances: effects of formant contour. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[246]  R Drullman,et al.  Speech intelligibility in noise: relative contribution of speech elements above and below the noise level. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[247]  J. Culling,et al.  Auditory segregation of competing voices: absence of effects of FM or AM coherence. , 1992, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[248]  Gerald Langner,et al.  Periodicity coding in the auditory system , 1992, Hearing Research.

[249]  Stuart Rosen,et al.  Perceptual adaptation by normal listeners to upward shifts of spectral information in speech and its relevance for users of cochlear implants , 1997 .

[250]  David Kirby,et al.  Perceptual compensation for transmission channel and speaker effects on vowel quality , 1989, Speech Commun..

[251]  T. Houtgast,et al.  The Modulation Transfer Function in Room Acoustics as a Predictor of Speech Intelligibility , 1973 .

[252]  H. Dillon,et al.  An international comparison of long‐term average speech spectra , 1994 .

[253]  Neal F. Viemeister,et al.  Adaptation of Masking , 1980 .

[254]  J. M. Ackroff,et al.  Auditory Induction: Perceptual Synthesis of Absent Sounds , 1972, Science.

[255]  A S Bregman,et al.  Perceived continuity of gliding and steady-state tones through interrupting noise , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[256]  Yifan Gong,et al.  Speech recognition in noisy environments: A survey , 1995, Speech Commun..

[257]  R Plomp,et al.  The effect of head-induced interaural time and level differences on speech intelligibility in noise. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[258]  D D Dirks,et al.  Masking effects of speech competing messages. , 1969, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[259]  G. A. Miller,et al.  The Intelligibility of Interrupted Speech , 1948 .

[260]  Alan R. Palmer,et al.  Chapter 3 – Neural Signal Processing , 1995 .

[261]  B. Moore,et al.  Thresholds for the detection of inharmonicity in complex tones. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[262]  J. Junqua,et al.  Acoustic and perceptual studies of Lombard speech: application to isolated-words automatic speech recognition , 1990, International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[263]  S. McAdams Segregation of concurrent sounds. I: Effects of frequency modulation coherence. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[264]  A. Nabelek,et al.  Vowel errors in noise and in reverberation by hearing-impaired listeners. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[265]  L D Braida,et al.  Auditory supplements to speechreading: combining amplitude envelope cues from different spectral regions of speech. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[266]  S McAdams,et al.  Identification of concurrent harmonic and inharmonic vowels: a test of the theory of harmonic cancellation and enhancement. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[267]  Q Summerfield,et al.  Minimal spectral contrast of formant peaks for vowel recognition as a function of spectral slope , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[268]  T Houtgast,et al.  Peaks in the frequency response of hearing aids: evaluation of the effects on speech intelligibility and sound quality. , 1996, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[269]  H Müsch,et al.  Using statistical decision theory to predict speech intelligibility. II. Measurement and prediction of consonant-discrimination performance. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[270]  Harvey b. Fletcher,et al.  Speech and hearing in communication , 1953 .

[271]  L. Rabiner,et al.  Predicting binaural gain in intelligibility and release from masking for speech. , 1967, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[272]  M. E. H. Schouten,et al.  The psychophysics of speech perception , 1987 .

[273]  L. A. Chistovich Central auditory processing of peripheral vowel spectra. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[274]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Access and integration: projecting sound onto meaning , 1989 .

[275]  R. M. Warren,et al.  Spectral redundancy: Intelligibility of sentences heard through narrow spectral slits , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

[276]  Daniel P. W. Ellis,et al.  The auditory organization of speech and other sources in listeners and computational models , 2001, Speech Commun..

[277]  B C Moore,et al.  Auditory filter shapes in subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear impairments. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[278]  A K Nábĕlek,et al.  Cues for perception of the diphthong /aI/ in either noise or reverberation. Part I. Duration of the transition. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[279]  Milan Vego,et al.  Center of Gravity , 2000 .

[280]  Axel Michelsen,et al.  Time Resolution in Auditory Systems , 1985, Proceedings in Life Sciences.

[281]  J. B. Pickering,et al.  Vowel Perception and Production , 1994 .

[282]  J Verschuure,et al.  Intelligibility of interrupted meaningful and nonsense speech with and without intervening noise , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[283]  A R Palmer,et al.  Responses of auditory-nerve fibers to stimuli producing psychophysical enhancement. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[284]  H. Lane Psychophysical parameters of vowel perception. , 1962 .

[285]  G. A. Miller,et al.  The intelligibility of speech as a function of the context of the test materials. , 1951, Journal of experimental psychology.

[286]  H. Lane,et al.  The Lombard Sign and the Role of Hearing in Speech , 1971 .

[287]  Sharlene A. Liu,et al.  Landmark detection for distinctive feature-based speech recognition , 1996 .

[288]  K N Stevens ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES USED FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF SPEECH SOUNDS a , 1983, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[289]  B. Moore,et al.  Evaluation of a method of simulating reduced frequency selectivity. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[290]  Q Summerfield,et al.  Perceiving vowels from uniform spectra: Phonetic exploration of an auditory aftereffect , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[291]  John E. Markel,et al.  Linear Prediction of Speech , 1976, Communication and Cybernetics.

[292]  A. M. Mimpen,et al.  Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. , 1979, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[293]  L.L. Beranek,et al.  The Design of Speech Communication Systems , 1947, Proceedings of the IRE.

[294]  R Plomp,et al.  The effect of a hearing aid on the speech-reception threshold of hearing-impaired listeners in quiet and in noise. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[295]  R B Gardner,et al.  Mistuning a harmonic of a vowel: grouping and phase effects on vowel quality. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[296]  R. L. Wegel,et al.  The Auditory Masking of One Pure Tone by Another and its Probable Relation to the Dynamics of the Inner Ear , 1924 .

[297]  S. S. Stevens,et al.  The Masking of Pure Tones and of Speech by White Noise , 1950 .

[298]  A. Boothroyd,et al.  Mathematical treatment of context effects in phoneme and word recognition. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[299]  D Kewley-Port,et al.  Modeling formant frequency discrimination of female vowels. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[300]  T. Houtgast,et al.  A review of the MTF concept in room acoustics and its use for estimating speech intelligibility in auditoria , 1985 .

[301]  I M Noordhoek,et al.  Effect of reducing temporal intensity modulations on sentence intelligibility. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[302]  W M Hartmann,et al.  Pitch, periodicity, and auditory organization. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[303]  A. J. Watkins,et al.  Perceptual compensation for speaker differences and for spectral-envelope distortion. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[304]  J. M. Pickett,et al.  Perception of Vowels Heard in Noises of Various Spectra , 1957 .

[305]  Claude E. Shannon,et al.  Prediction and Entropy of Printed English , 1951 .

[306]  C. E. SHANNON,et al.  A mathematical theory of communication , 1948, MOCO.

[307]  B. Moore,et al.  Suggested formulae for calculating auditory-filter bandwidths and excitation patterns. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[308]  R. H. Bernacki,et al.  Effects of noise on speech production: acoustic and perceptual analyses. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[309]  J. Hillenbrand,et al.  Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[310]  Harvey Fletcher,et al.  The Perception of Speech Sounds by Deafened Persons , 1952 .

[311]  C W Turner,et al.  Use of temporal envelope cues in speech recognition by normal and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[312]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Lexical Representation and Process , 1991 .

[313]  J. Laver,et al.  The handbook of phonetic sciences , 1999 .

[314]  P F Assmann,et al.  Perception of front vowels: the role of harmonics in the first formant region. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[315]  S Buus,et al.  Release from masking caused by envelope fluctuations. , 1985, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[316]  B C Moore,et al.  Effects of spectral smearing on the intelligibility of sentences in the presence of interfering speech. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.